An important check on government policy on issues such as illegal drugs, hybrid embryo research and ID cards will be lost as a result of Gordon Brown's planned changes to the way science is dealt with by government, MPs claimed today.

MPs and leading scientists are concerned that the influential parliamentary science and technology select committee is on the verge of being disbanded because of departmental rearrangements, something one MP described as a "calamity" for science in government.

By moving responsibility for science into the newly created Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills, the existing parliamentary science and technology select committee will almost certainly be engulfed by a larger departmental committee that is likely to become bogged down by political rows over higher education.

"The scientific community are going to lose faith in this place if the science and technology select committee goes," said Brian Iddon, a Labour MP who sits on the committee. "If we were shrunk into a departmental committee that would be a calamity."

The committee has recently tackled subjects that have impacted on diverse areas of government policy including the problems posed by human enhancement in sport, the flimsy evidence basis for UK drug laws, ID card technology and the case for having a British astronaut.

It is widely credited with playing a crucial role in the government's change of policy on research using human hybrid embryos.

Sir Martin Rees, the head of the Royal Society, called the committee an important "check and balance" on government.

"The science and technology select committee has given a constructive high profile to science which becomes more important every day as parliament increasingly tackles issues such as stem cell research and nuclear power," he said.

"For this reason there needs to be a select committee that can deal with scientific issues that span several departments."

The former head of the Royal Society, Lord May, said that the committee's ability to pick topics from different government departments was a great strength.

"Under a series of interesting chairs it has done distinctive things," he said, "It would be a pity to see it go."

The committee's chair, Liberal Democrat MP Phil Willis, has written to the chief whip, Geoff Hoon, to ask for a last-minute reprieve.

"I am sure that you will agree that given the government's focus on evidence-based policy-making and the wide consensus on the value of science in our society, this would be the wrong time to downgrade or reduce the scrutiny of cross-cutting science issues within parliament," he wrote.

"The strong view amongst the science community is that such scrutiny is best carried out by a select committee with a clear identity and a clear mission."

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning: "What we are very worried about, and indeed what the whole of the science community is worried about - including the Royal Societies, the Royal Society of Chemistry, etc. - is that the scrutiny of science right across government, at a time when science is at the heart of every single policy which the government puts forward, will be downgraded or in some cases will disappear altogether.

"I don't think it is malice by the government at all. I think they haven't considered this very valuable role which the cross-party committee serves."

Evan Harris MP, the Liberal Democrats' science spokesperson and a member of the committee, said, "It would be unfortunate if the government's good reputation in the science community were to be tarnish by its abolition of the major parliamentary focus for scrutiny of science across government."